Session 1
9 September, 2025
Check the message Welcome greeting published in the News Bulletin Board.
Dear student please edit your profile uploading a photo where your face is clearly visible.
The purpose of the virtual meetings is to answer questions and not to make a summary of the study material.
This presentation is based on (Lewicki et al., 2024, Chapter 5)
Purpose
Ethics is understand as the social standards that are apply to examine what is right or wrong in a specific situation or a process to establish such standards (Lewicki et al., 2024, Chapter 5, p. 136).
The ethical considerations in a negotiation are related to how the exchange of information occurs (Lewicki & Robinson, 1998).
There are tactics that are not ethical and that can be quickly identified, such as stealing confidential data from the counterpart.
However, in the context of negotiation there are gray areas. These gray areas are known as ethically ambiguous tactics within the theory of negotiation.
Gray areas within a negotiating context regarding ethically ambiguous tactics are presented due to the 2 dilemmas a negotiator faces:
Dilemma of honesty
Dilemma of trust
Why do negotiators use deceptive tactics in the context of a negotiation?
Need to acquire greater power through the manipulation of information to get closer to the target point
Use of a more competitive negotiation style1
Effectiveness
Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences when the outcome of the negotiation improves compared to whether a negotiator had acted ethically and if the conduct is not punished where the consequences materialize in the short run.
Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences because the reputation of the negotiator is damaged where the consequences materialize in the future.
Reactions of Others
Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences only if constituents, indirect actors or interest observers considered appropriate to use this type of tactics2.
Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences because retaliations occur directly from the counterpart and possibly from the constituents, indirect actors or interest observers if they consider that the tactic used is inappropriate3.
Reactions of Self
Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences only if the negotiator does not suffer from guilt, remorse or discomfort.
Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences when the negotiator suffers from guilt, remorse or discomfort for having used these tactics4
My personal opinion:
Read the article (Adler, 2007):
Before the Bargaining Begins
During the Bargaining Process
I think the best approach is to follow the recommendations in the section Before the Bargaining Begins because they are carried out during the planning stage of a negotiation where there is more time and information that can be collected in order to respond adequately to deceptive tactics.
To my family that supports me
To the taxpayers of Colombia and the UMNG students who pay my salary
To the Business Science and R4DS Online Learning communities where I learn R and \(\pi\)-thon
To the R Core Team, the creators of RStudio IDE, Quarto and the authors and maintainers of the packages tinytex for allowing me to access these tools without paying for a license
This aspect generates a greater probability of using this type of tactics
This is my own personal opinion and it is not mentioned in (Lewicki et al., 2024, Chapter 5)
As a personal opinion in the case of the indirect actors or interest observers the retaliation is materialize through a social sanction.
This issue directly affects the negotiation since the negotiator is willing to make greater concessions to the counterpart to compensate for using deceptive tactics.